I do agree with petersachs on allmost all his points except one, this will not help the hobby in CT,,i applaud his efforts to help the hobby,,,,,and i do understand his position..I am well aware Rivera didnt break any laws and i applaud the fact he is sueing the HPD,they were wrong,,, i never said he broke the law, what he did do was basically bait the police to act...nice of his employer WFSB TV to throw him under the bus as well.. but what will ultimately happen becuase of this action,,,is , it will now force new state laws to be enacted and he generated a media story that most people dont understand, all they hear is a DRONE and a CAMERA and PRIVACY INTRUSION which will lead to new laws, wait until there is a national incidient with one of these and the DHS gets their two cents in, they will outright ban them... i hope Peter is right and i am wrong about that point because I too have a great passion for the RC hobby and this Phantom i own,,,,,all it takes is one person to ruin it for everybody,,,,AND I also see the side that this may help us...... that may bear some fruit when this case is ruled on, we'll see,,,, but i am not convinced that will be the case in the regulation state of CT....,,good luck with the case and I hope he wins, since this is now a legal action, we will see how the courts decide and see what washes out in the legislature....at least we will now have a case study here to reference...
Safe response to police officer who says to stop flying
- Thread starter Nvr2fst
- Start date
I fully understand your concerns.jwuman said:
Please remember however that states are limited in the types of legislation they can pass. When it comes down to it, states can only regulate the use of drone by public agencies. They cannot regulate anything that federal law would preempt. (This is true even though there is currently no drone law. The mere fact that there will be federal drone laws is enough to show a federal intention to "occupy the field" and thereby preempt any state regulation efforts.
As for privacy issues, any state law that attempts to infringe upon the right of any person to exercise their constitutional right to photography anything in plain site from a public place will be struck down as unconstitutional.
Your concerns are very valid, but I hope the explanation above provides you will some comfort as to what states can and cannot do.
Regards,
Peter
Spanktim- Hawaii --ouch! thats what im talking about,,,
PeterS, thanks again for the great info and your valuble insights; although commpletely un-related; since having to re-register my guns, then separately register my magazines, then re-register my assualt weapon (that was already registered), it would be of no surprise to me that state already has the inside track on getting around anything regardless of our rights, its a sad state of affairs here in CT, wish i could move....
I have yet to be approached by law enforcement when flying in the SE CT area and R.I. shoreline area ,,,i am sure this will happen sooner or later and I intend to follow any instructions I may recieve and move to another location vs. challenging a LEO..i would try to keep the interactions openly non-confrontational and attempt to demo the unit, educate and advise I am well aware of my rights to fly, but, I would honor any request to stop if that is what was requested. I would then take it up with the city/town atty and PD supervisors after that if i felt the LEO was out of line. Having a slew of LEO in my immediate family and many relative family members in LEO dating back to the 1930's in R.I., I have a tremendous amount of respect for LEO's and would never challenge their intent.
Be safe flying everyone.
PeterS, thanks again for the great info and your valuble insights; although commpletely un-related; since having to re-register my guns, then separately register my magazines, then re-register my assualt weapon (that was already registered), it would be of no surprise to me that state already has the inside track on getting around anything regardless of our rights, its a sad state of affairs here in CT, wish i could move....
I have yet to be approached by law enforcement when flying in the SE CT area and R.I. shoreline area ,,,i am sure this will happen sooner or later and I intend to follow any instructions I may recieve and move to another location vs. challenging a LEO..i would try to keep the interactions openly non-confrontational and attempt to demo the unit, educate and advise I am well aware of my rights to fly, but, I would honor any request to stop if that is what was requested. I would then take it up with the city/town atty and PD supervisors after that if i felt the LEO was out of line. Having a slew of LEO in my immediate family and many relative family members in LEO dating back to the 1930's in R.I., I have a tremendous amount of respect for LEO's and would never challenge their intent.
Be safe flying everyone.
I don't think CT will pass any laws about drones that will affect private person r/c flyers, rather just the public agency flyers. I think anything re: photography/videography would be struck down if passed.jwuman said:
I've only been approach by LEOs because they thought it was cool.
I work with LEOs near daily for work and volunteer FD reasons, and I have great respect for them. I agree with your approach, if approached. If nothing else, it's civil.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 11
- Reaction score
- 0
First flight performed today with my new P2V at the neighborhood park, which is a city block in length and width. I was the only one present in the park as it was rather cold in Denver today with moderate winds 12G18. I kept in easy and warmed up with basic flight maneuvers for the first 5 minutes, then I started doing the race car track making loops at a decent clip. Park Ranger approached with a smile...just my luck on my first flight. :shock: I politely informed him, "let me bring her in and catch her and I'll be right with you".
The Park Ranger was very nice and informed me that flying objects are not allowed in any city parks in Denver. He said he is seeing a lot of quads lately and nobody seems to know about the park rules. I thanked him and packed it up. When I got home I looked it up.
35. FLYING OBJECTS: Throwing, striking, propelling or otherwise operating flying or Propelled objects of a potentially dangerous nature, such as hang gliders, sky sails, model airplanes and rockets, horseshoes, arrows, golf balls, baseballs or rocks, but not limited to these, is prohibited and unlawful except in special use areas provided for the purpose. (Section 39 20(a) (1) (2) (3) (4) and (8) and Section 39 20(b) RMC)
I guess Ill apply for a permit... :roll: or drive 20 minutes to a rc park.
The Park Ranger was very nice and informed me that flying objects are not allowed in any city parks in Denver. He said he is seeing a lot of quads lately and nobody seems to know about the park rules. I thanked him and packed it up. When I got home I looked it up.
35. FLYING OBJECTS: Throwing, striking, propelling or otherwise operating flying or Propelled objects of a potentially dangerous nature, such as hang gliders, sky sails, model airplanes and rockets, horseshoes, arrows, golf balls, baseballs or rocks, but not limited to these, is prohibited and unlawful except in special use areas provided for the purpose. (Section 39 20(a) (1) (2) (3) (4) and (8) and Section 39 20(b) RMC)
I guess Ill apply for a permit... :roll: or drive 20 minutes to a rc park.
I just looked at the entire list of rules for that park.
What can you do there?
Why bother even having the park?
What can you do there?
Why bother even having the park?
I was sitting on a bench flying my Vision. At about 50 feet AGL, I flew it over my head until it was about 100 feet directly behind me. Piloting via the first person view on my iPhone screen, I brought it down to about 10 feet. The camera was angled downward and recording the flight. I figured it would be neat to fly the Vision at a good clip back over my own ski-cap-topped head.Pull_Up said:
Well wouldn't you know it, in the 5 minutes I'd been sitting there a 25 foot tall tree had sneaked up behind the bench. I flew the quad right into it at nearly full speed, with just enough time to say "uh-oh" as the bottom of the tree appeared on the small screen.
I also wanted to thank you, Pull Up, for your clear and easy to follow instructions on how to use GIMP to correct fisheye in Vision photos. in the 3 weeks that I owned my P2 Vision before it decided to fly away, I had applied your "quick and dirty" fix to a number of Vision photos with delightful results. Beats the snot out of paying for editing software.
petersachs said:I just looked at the entire list of rules for that park.
What can you do there?
Why bother even having the park?
It's in Denver you say? So the only thing they allow to get high in the park is you! Smoke em if ya got em! :lol:
EDIT; saw the post above after I made mine from the previous page. Great minds think alike! :mrgreen:
LuvMyTJ said:petersachs said:I just looked at the entire list of rules for that park.
What can you do there?
Why bother even having the park?
It's in Denver you say? So the only thing they allow to get high in the park is you! Smoke em if ya got em! :lol:
EDIT; saw the post above after I made mine from the previous page. Great minds think alike! :mrgreen:
Just be careful, that's been known to interfere with your RTH function
'Hallo Officer,
Yes a lovely day for flying.
No I'm not peeping into windows.
Did you know though, that the US, British, Australian and many other governments have been hoovering up emails, phone calls, and other private information from everyday citizens who are not breaking the law? Did you also know that the NSA bugs the phones of heads of government including Angela Merkel, Indonesian Pesident Yudhiyono, the leaders of Brazil, Mexico, Greece and others. They have hacked the databases of tech conglomerates and interfered with undersea telecommunication cables. I might also mention that the British GCHQ developed ways of hacking people's cell phones and have also stolen and stored webcam footage from innocent citizens, including images of a sexual nature.
Would you mind doing me a favor and perhaps look into this pervasive, international-scale intrusion on our personal lives and civil liberties before cracking down on me and my copter?
Cheers for that.'
*sound of police truncheon striking skull*
Yes a lovely day for flying.
No I'm not peeping into windows.
Did you know though, that the US, British, Australian and many other governments have been hoovering up emails, phone calls, and other private information from everyday citizens who are not breaking the law? Did you also know that the NSA bugs the phones of heads of government including Angela Merkel, Indonesian Pesident Yudhiyono, the leaders of Brazil, Mexico, Greece and others. They have hacked the databases of tech conglomerates and interfered with undersea telecommunication cables. I might also mention that the British GCHQ developed ways of hacking people's cell phones and have also stolen and stored webcam footage from innocent citizens, including images of a sexual nature.
Would you mind doing me a favor and perhaps look into this pervasive, international-scale intrusion on our personal lives and civil liberties before cracking down on me and my copter?
Cheers for that.'
*sound of police truncheon striking skull*
El Rey said:
lol,,aint that the truth!..U.S. U.K. Intel linked to vision cameras...DJI SpyQuads.....what really happened to Colin?.....
Why not take the offensive ...
I'm sorry officer ... I really can't reveal my "sponsor" but suffice to say this vehicle is serving in a critical patriotic effort and has clearance at the highest levels. Of course there's no one you can check with because the program director must maintain plausible deniability. I've really said more than I should have. On your way, please. You've drawn too much attention here as it is.
I'm sorry officer ... I really can't reveal my "sponsor" but suffice to say this vehicle is serving in a critical patriotic effort and has clearance at the highest levels. Of course there's no one you can check with because the program director must maintain plausible deniability. I've really said more than I should have. On your way, please. You've drawn too much attention here as it is.
Visioneer said:
Yup, you go on ahead and do that.
Just make sure you film the whole event (and the aftermath) for all of us to see
GneeChee said:Visioneer said:
Yup, you go on ahead and do that.
Just make sure you film the whole event (and the aftermath) for all of us to see
Oops, forgot to use the sarcasm font.
Similar threads
